Mns wrote:
I agree, let's just start making concessions while we're teetering on the brink of an international economic collapse. China's already banging the drum of removing the dollar's status of being the one international currency. How do you think that would've played out if the US defaulted on its loans for the first time in history because of an incredibly vocal minority?
The "default" scenario never would have played out even with no raise in the debt ceiling. The treasury takes in enough money every month to cover the service on the debt and then some. There would have been a lot more political theater like the spending money to barricade open-air parks in the form of such things as threatening not to send out Social Security checks, but there would have been no default.
Mns wrote:
Also, a popular website is having trouble keeping up with the initial bandwidth of thousands of people trying to access it. Its not like you would have any personal experience with that, would you? We're not even talking about the (red) states whos governors and state legislatures are doing everything in their power to make Obamacare fail, by the way. Deliberately sabotaging a program and then using said program as an example on why government doesn't work is a hallmark of the conservative mindset.
Funny, I believe I said that I didn't think it fair to judge the program's success at this point exactly because I know how the first few days/weeks of a new launch generally work. Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on how you look at it, you and I aren't representative of the general public, and not even of all the people who have ever used an online service who remain completely surprised when a new, untested system gets its ass handed to it by the flood of users on launch day. You can bitch about "red staters" all you want, but I don't know what's so surprising about a bunch of people who didn't want anything to do with a program doing everything they possible can to avoid it, or why something so easily predicted could be so infuriating. It's like you're sticking a gun in someone's face and demanding they stick a dildo in their ass, then getting pissed off when they don't smile while they do it.
Oh, and following the logic so far in this thread: they won their elections, get fucked.
Mns wrote:
The initial hiccups were a problem, yeah, but the representatives you agree with decided to try and hold a gun to the government's head instead of doing something people would actually view as smart.
It wouldn't have mattered if every republican in congress went on TV and said, "You know, we're going to try to make this work," then came up with a bill that addressed all the problems and actually made the program work. President Obama still would have said, "this is extortion, and I shouldn't have to negotiate," rather than give the republicans a 'victory.'
Not that anyone would be stupid enough to put their fingerprints on this unpopular soon to be disaster, but even if they were, they still would have been shot down, just like they were over holding congress to the same standards as the rest of America and granting everyone the same special favors reserved for some people's special little snowflakes.
Mns wrote:
Then again, "smart" is a rare word in a coalition of snake-handlers, gay-bashers, bigots, and anti-intellectuals.
I never tire of the "you don't agree with me so obviously you're all terrible people." You're like a fucking child telling someone they're a meany-poo-poo-face.
LOL, congrats on beating the meanies, enjoy your prizes and gift basket.Your Pal,
Jubber
Thanks America!
) and his buddies thought they could win by holding a gun to the head of the government and, to a certain extent, world.